You won't be able to go from x86 to x64, but I imagine they'll have a way to fresh install like before if it sees you have a previous version of Windows on it. That's what they did with XP to 7 upgrades.

I know I can't install 64 on top of 32, but could I get a copy for Win8 64 for the 40 dollars, if I have Win7 32.

I think that screenshot is most likely from an ARM tablet or so, where the amount of memory used really matters (And it'll also be an absolutely fresh install so not representative of general workload, etc.)

On my system (7 SP1) it's using 2.69GB of RAM with no user visible apps apart from Steam open, reducing the base load by 200MB is fine, but doesn't mean much to a normal computer (Although it sure as hell matters on a tablet)

I think that screenshot is most likely from an ARM tablet or so, where the amount of memory used really matters (And it'll also be an absolutely fresh install so not representative of general workload, etc.)

On my system (7 SP1) it's using 2.69GB of RAM with no user visible apps apart from Steam open, reducing the base load by 200MB is fine, but doesn't mean much to a normal computer (Although it sure as hell matters on a tablet)

It depends on how much RAM you have installed too because Windows scales its usage. That system only has 1GB of installed memory.

I think that screenshot is most likely from an ARM tablet or so, where the amount of memory used really matters (And it'll also be an absolutely fresh install so not representative of general workload, etc.)

On my system (7 SP1) it's using 2.69GB of RAM with no user visible apps apart from Steam open, reducing the base load by 200MB is fine, but doesn't mean much to a normal computer (Although it sure as hell matters on a tablet)

It can't be. WinRT doesn't run the traditional desktop, meaning it can't run the Aero Task Manager Window.

Edited:

Also 4gb of DDR3 today is $20. If you don't have 8gb of RAM maybe you should spend some cash before complaining about RAM usage.

I have 8gb, and I don't think I've ever used more than 3gb at any one time.
not that I monitor that.

It can't be. WinRT doesn't run the traditional desktop, meaning it can't run the Aero Task Manager Window.

Edited:

Also 4gb of DDR3 today is $20. If you don't have 8gb of RAM maybe you should spend some cash before complaining about RAM usage.

I have 8gb, and I don't think I've ever used more than 3gb at any one time.
not that I monitor that.

"WinRT" still has the normal desktop (It's where Office runs), it's just that 3rd party developers can't target it, they're limited to "Metro" apps. And even then Microsoft have the source code and all the compilers, they can do whatever they want during development.

And I wasn't complaining about RAM usage (I've got 8GB so meh), but unlike desktops, you really can't upgrade the RAM in a tablet, so usage matters there.

Seems like they're just trying to be cool by using words like 'app' and shit that really don't suit Microsoft's corporate appeal.

Uhhh...app is shorthand for application, you know, the things modern computers have run since their creation? Apps aren't a new idea at all, but the use of the shorthand has certainly become a buzzword of some sorts.

And, oh that is so cute, you think MS are all about the corporate market still. My what you've missed in recent history! MS have had a personal and family computing focus for at least a decade now.

Iunno, that's a good deal, but I'm not sure about W8. I really hate some of the changes they made. Like, this:

is really a dealbreaker for me. I'm still using Office 2003 because I refuse to use that retarded fucking ribbon layout. If there's an option to use the normal Windows convention then that would go a long way for me, because just that sort of thing- changing ingrained items- is really what's keeping me against Win8.

Iunno, that's a good deal, but I'm not sure about W8. I really hate some of the changes they made. Like, this:

is really a dealbreaker for me. I'm still using Office 2003 because I refuse to use that retarded fucking ribbon layout. If there's an option to use the normal Windows convention then that would go a long way for me, because just that sort of thing- changing ingrained items- is really what's keeping me against Win8.

Dude, that screenshot is from, like, February 2011 or something - you can collapse the ribbon. Anyhow, I find it fairly useful.

Iunno, that's a good deal, but I'm not sure about W8. I really hate some of the changes they made. Like, this:

is really a dealbreaker for me. I'm still using Office 2003 because I refuse to use that retarded fucking ribbon layout. If there's an option to use the normal Windows convention then that would go a long way for me, because just that sort of thing- changing ingrained items- is really what's keeping me against Win8.

Implying you can't customize and modify the UI's to how you want them? Not to mention the screenshot you are showing us is rather dated, and you can collapse the "retarded fucking ribbon layout".

Iunno, that's a good deal, but I'm not sure about W8. I really hate some of the changes they made. Like, this:

is really a dealbreaker for me. I'm still using Office 2003 because I refuse to use that retarded fucking ribbon layout. If there's an option to use the normal Windows convention then that would go a long way for me, because just that sort of thing- changing ingrained items- is really what's keeping me against Win8.

It's minimized by default, and you don't really have to use it. Not to mention with the QAT you could pin Open CMD Prompt to it, and hit Alt+1 (or whatever location it's at) and just open it there. So it's actually useful.

Iunno, that's a good deal, but I'm not sure about W8. I really hate some of the changes they made. Like, this:

is really a dealbreaker for me. I'm still using Office 2003 because I refuse to use that retarded fucking ribbon layout. If there's an option to use the normal Windows convention then that would go a long way for me, because just that sort of thing- changing ingrained items- is really what's keeping me against Win8.

The ribbon is actually quite sensible if you actually bothered to take some time to use it for a normal usage period. I was a bit sceptical of it at first, but after a few hours of use the ribbon kinda stuck with me and yeah, I can see what MS were trying with it, and it works if implemented right. We still have our keyboard shortcuts, but now the menu items aren't a list of bollocks, important items are easily visible and take no time to find.

My point is that I don't want a customizable ribbon, or one that collapses/minimizes. It's nonsensical to take a perfectly reasonable method that's been in place for years and just throw it out in favor of super-simplicity for the super-simple. I've been made to use the Office 07 and 2010 ribbon enough in school, on friends' computers, and at work, and I still find it to be totally unusable at the worst of times and annoying at the best. Besides being crazily nonsensical it's also an eyesore that takes up far more space with far less functionality and with far less ease to use.

And it's that sort of thing that bugs me. The start menu is another thing with that, though I'm not so opposed to that because it still offers most of the same ease of use, although seemingly also taking up more space than necessary and over-simplifying it. I don't understand why moderately easy to use methods need to be chopped down to the bare minimum to the point where it's not easily usable for anyone but people who only use 10 commands, yet take up more space than ever with gaudy windows and themes and whatever. That's my issue. It's at the point where OS is more damned Windows-oriented than Windows itself in its UI. And that's what bugs me. Alot. I don't like changes in my UI, and when there must be changes I don't like them so sudden and violent.

My point is that I don't want a customizable ribbon, or one that collapses/minimizes. It's nonsensical to take a perfectly reasonable method that's been in place for years and just throw it out in favor of super-simplicity for the super-simple. I've been made to use the Office 07 and 2010 ribbon enough in school, on friends' computers, and at work, and I still find it to be totally unusable at the worst of times and annoying at the best. Besides being crazily nonsensical it's also an eyesore that takes up far more space with far less functionality and with far less ease to use.

And it's that sort of thing that bugs me. The start menu is another thing with that, though I'm not so opposed to that because it still offers most of the same ease of use, although seemingly also taking up more space than necessary and over-simplifying it. I don't understand why moderately easy to use methods need to be chopped down to the bare minimum to the point where it's not easily usable for anyone but people who only use 10 commands, yet take up more space than ever with gaudy windows and themes and whatever. That's my issue. It's at the point where OS is more damned Windows-oriented than Windows itself in its UI. And that's what bugs me. Alot. I don't like changes in my UI, and when there must be changes I don't like them so sudden and violent.

They did the same in Vista/7 by replacing and removing a lot of the functionality from toolbars and just replaced it with a simple command bar. So I assume you'd like to go back to XP?

You know, i've heard of that theory or whatever it is that basically every other Windows version is shit.
I mean, we had Vista (oh god what a fiasco), then Windows 7 which was (is) the best thing ever since XP, and now we're at Windows 8.

$40 is a damn good deal, but I think i'll pass up 8 and see what they'll give us next time.

From what I hear it isn't worth the 40$ or getting rid of 7. Tough 40$ is cheap as hell for a new OS.

There's room for A LOT of improvement later on down the road though.

It's tough, but it may be better and smarter to just pass up on the 40 dollar offer here.

Edited:

Plus, this is another MAJOR step foward for them.

Just like Vista was from XP, and look at how that turned out. (Of course the next version to come out, Windows 7, was what Vista should have been)
It may, just may, end up like that again.

Overall, I think it would be better to pass up Windows 8 so that's what i'll do.
Windows 7 is fine as is for now, and i'll wait until the version after 8 when they've ironed out all the shit Windows 8 will have.

I love how Delta spams boxes everywhere as soon as someone disagrees with him
EVEN when they have a valid point.

Again, I don't mind changes, but they need to ease into them and not just go "hey guize we've had this our entire existence. FUCK IT. you get to use this completely different thing that's impossible to find anything in because we only make the 10 most common functions easy to find in an appropriate place, since we're appealing tot he lowest common denominator now."

I love how Delta spams boxes everywhere as soon as someone disagrees with him
EVEN when they have a valid point.

Yes, because calling Windows 8 a downgrade, or not wanting to buy an OS because of an optional ribbon layout in windows explorer is totally a valid point. Do everyone an favor and stop criticizing something that has nothing to do with the topic of the thread. If someone's opinion differs from mine, but provides logic on why, fine, who am I to judge. If the stupid, i'll rate it dumb.

I personally really hate Metro. To be honest I hate the direction Microsoft is taking Windows in. I'd like to have a nicer faster OS and for $40 it's a fucking steal. But I really love Aero and a lot of the features of Windows 7.

I personally really hate Metro. To be honest I hate the direction Microsoft is taking Windows in. I'd like to have a nicer faster OS and for $40 it's a fucking steal. But I really love Aero and a lot of the features of Windows 7.